You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

South, this is one topic that you obviously know nothing about, so get back to studying for your finals. Also, no one has ever said that leaving Kyoto will **** the environment, the goals set out are simply unachievable. All this environmental crap has swung too far the other way, just like unions and all the rest. Where do you think the $14 billion would come from? My pocket, your pocket (well, your parent's pocket) and every other taxpayers pocket. $14 BILLION DOLLARS while China and India don't pay a dime while profiting from all the manufacturing they are doing (which causes all the pollution), while unemployment is soaring here, and immigration to Canada (but that's a whole different can of worms). Don't get me started on all the greenpeace BS synthetic fur wearing brainwashed dumbasses with liberal arts degress.

This brewing transatlantic dispute over the tar sands stems from the likelihood that the EU could officially block the sale of Alberta oil in Europe given its high carbon content.

Good. Let Europe block our oil trade. Will just sell more of it to China. Hell China would build the pipeline from Alberta over the bearing straight, right into its front door if we told them it's okay with us.

What we need to do is get Canada wealthy like the UAE.

This whole "trade sanctions" is total bull shit when we have the oil and the money... oh and the uranium, gold, copper, nickel, etc. Europes got nothing to trade with us anyway, except for a few shitty beers.

On another note why are we paying so much for gas when we have a sea of oil????? wtf

South, this is one topic that you obviously know nothing about, so get back to studying for your finals. Also, no one has ever said that leaving Kyoto will **** the environment, the goals set out are simply unachievable. All this environmental crap has swung too far the other way, just like unions and all the rest. Where do you think the $14 billion would come from? My pocket, your pocket (well, your parent's pocket) and every other taxpayers pocket. $14 BILLION DOLLARS while China and India don't pay a dime while profiting from all the manufacturing they are doing (which causes all the pollution), while unemployment is soaring here, and immigration to Canada (but that's a whole different can of worms). Don't get me started on all the greenpeace BS synthetic fur wearing brainwashed dumbasses with liberal arts degress.

You know that common knowledge thing that if the rest of the world lived like Canadians and Americans we would need three earth's just for resources alone. But hey its ok buddy. If you want to support your government just because they are your government, by all means brohan! So if our government elites decide that 14 billion is too high a price to pay to be part of a protocol that can save our environment then yeah go ahead. Your not going to benefit from that 14 billion LOL, only corporations.

Remember a country doesn't just pay the carbon tax on what is actually being produced inside the country, but what it is importing and exporting as well. Hence that link you probably didn't read of how the European Union wanted to ban or tax heavily oil coming from Alberta because of its cost to environment and how the WTO was like no no no you can't do that you said our charter and corporations have rights you know and the European union was like ****.

Anyway back to you brohan. What was it again that I didn't know? That Kyoto wasn't achievable? Ok well I linked in this post and above this one and in the thread there are other posts that show evidence it is achievable. So smart-ass who regurgitates what elites say to justify actions that will benefit other elites, what is the WAY to stop emissions other than the framework set out by the Kyoto accord? hmm? see if Canada pulled out of Kyoto and said no we think the world should do this then thats fine. But as of yet they just left, didn't even really show up at Durban. Pathetic.

It's hard to get the big picture when you have such a small screen. oh btw how exactly is it obvious that I am the one that has to idea about this?.

Why you and Harper and Kent look retarded to the world claiming Kyoto was never achievable or pointless or whatever brohan. Green are the countries part of it. dark green the industrialized ones. Oh and try to deduce why America and now Canada are not green

Good. Let Europe block our oil trade. Will just sell more of it to China. Hell China would build the pipeline from Alberta over the bearing straight, right into its front door if we told them it's okay with us.

What we need to do is get Canada wealthy like the UAE.

This whole "trade sanctions" is total bull shit when we have the oil and the money... oh and the uranium, gold, copper, nickel, etc. Europes got nothing to trade with us anyway, except for a few shitty beers.

On another note why are we paying so much for gas when we have a sea of oil????? wtf

Canada is wealthy....we are like 5-6 behind UAE in GDPppp. Its not wealth that's the issue its the distribution of it. That is why I laugh when people think that 14 billion comes from the government directly, when in fact it comes indirectly from polluting corporations who are taxed under the accord.

Another country and region always has something to trade with us, comparative advantage, econ 101.

We are paying so much for gas because the insane profits go directly to corporations, who can choose to reinvest into their company and expand create more jobs - all good stuff - or they can give themselves bigger paychecks, bonuses and on top of that find ways to cut jobs because investors love a bigger and bigger profit increase.

Now Venezuela relatively recently nationalized its oil corporations and the benefits reaped have already shown. Cheaper gas, job stability in industry, all that good stuff. But hey nationalizing a corporations made up of individuals violates a corporations legal status as a individual under WTO and local statue laws.

not saying that other pollution is good. But there is no concrete evidence that CO2 promotes global warming. As wel I dont see how there can be a price tag on CO2 emission.

So I guess schools are teaching us liberal hoax crap is that it?

Sunlight hits the earth during the day
At night that energy is released back into space through infrared waves
CO2 and other greenhouse, let me emphasize, greenhouse, gases absorb the infrared
This heats shit up

More green house gases the more infrared is absorbed.

Price tag on greenhouse gases on CO2 emissions, OK STOP are you ****ing trolling me now? like did you read this thread or just post blindly. Information on this is provided throughout this thread in a number of links and references.

Maybe this will help for us to understand why Canada opted out..long but good read
if you disagree, go debate with Lorrie G.

Dishonest cowards
The real reason Canada gets attacked on Kyoto

By Lorrie Goldstein, QMI Agency

There’s a reason Canada is always disproportionately attacked at the United Nations’ annual gabfests on global warming — the latest version now underway in Durban, South Africa.

It’s that most of the 190 countries which attend, along with the global environmental movement, don’t want to call out the U.S. and China, the two key players on which any post-Kyoto agreement to lower global greenhouse gas emissions depends.

China and the U.S. are the respective leaders of the developing and developed worlds, they are responsible for a combined 40% of global emissions, they are the world’s number one and number two emitters and neither has to reduce emissions by a single tonne under Kyoto.

And yet Canada, responsible for 2% of emissions — including the oilsands at one-10th of 1% — routinely gets hysterically bashed at these never-ending UN confabs.

So what’s really going on?

First, diplomats from other countries are afraid of offending the two biggest economies in the world because of the potential diplomatic and economic fallout on other issues, so they use Canada as a whipping boy for the U.S. Environmentalists — who constantly engage in juvenile and asinine attacks on Canada at these conferences — do so because they don’t want to take on U.S. President Barack Obama.

They see him as a kindred spirit and their best hope for drafting a successor agreement to Kyoto.

Environmentalists won’t attack China because the green movement has deep roots in anti-Western, anti-capitalist, anti-development and anti-growth ideologies, and they see China as the last best hope for their discredited ideas. Indeed, many “environmentalists,” particularly in Europe, are Marxists, who were put out of business when the Soviet Union collapsed and communism was discredited in the early 1990s.

They transformed themselves into anti-global warming crusaders just as the Soviet Union was falling apart and the global warming movement was gathering steam.

Of course, pretending China is a bastion of communism is a joke. China today is a capitalist hybrid that is ardently pro-growth and pro-development, motivated by the need to feed its people, and building one greenhouse-gas spewing, coal-fired electricity plant a week.

It’s equally absurd for environmentalists and diplomats to attack Canada as a proxy for the U.S., while not taking on the U.S., because the American and Canadian positions in Durban are virtually identical.

Both have said they won’t sign a post-Kyoto agreement unless, unlike Kyoto, it contains hard targets to reduce emissions for China and the rest of the developing world, which oppose them.

Both countries have expressed major concerns about contributing to a
$100-billion-a-year climate mitigation fund to help poor nations, without these targets.

Both have rejected national carbon pricing.

The only difference between Canada and the U.S., both of which failed to meet their Kyoto emission targets, is that Jean Chretien idiotically ratified the economy-destroying deal, while the U.S. was never stupid enough to do so, starting with the Bill Clinton/Al Gore (surprise!) administration.

For environmentalists and diplomats to blame Canada ad nauseam at these annual UN conferences for the ongoing impasse on climate talks, instead of dealing with the key impasse of the U.S. versus China — is not only disingenuous, but dishonest, cowardly and craven.

It's OK, you seem to like the sound of your own voice. It's great that you can read wikipedia and consider yourself an expert , and yes, I am supporting the government, it's obvious by my post isn't it?

Are we now bringing in what people say as proof of evidence now? Lets have a discussion about religion then too. Does god exist *posts the bible* yes it does, argue with that. Thats the level of stupidity you just brought to this thread linking what some politician says without backing up anything he says with anything.

You know what when I am back from my vacation I am going to explain the propaganda model, because the second I read the bashing on marxism and China I knew this is going to be a great example of how this fits number 5 on the filter list.

Like just the first sentence. "Canada is always disproportionately attacked at the United Nations’ annual gabfests on global warming"

Um no its not, in fact its reported and referenced in this thread that they were one of the forefronters of environmentalism until the conservatives began encouraging the oil sands. Its not the amount of emissions people care about its the emission per capita, because this is a global protocol.
Canada is being targeted now because it is leaving the protocol even though it is industrialized wealthy nation who cannot even pay 14 billion in fines. Again mentioned in this thread a relatively measly amount of money being taken from taxes aimed at polluting corporations.

As also mentioned in this thread. We are America's bitch. They need water for their desert cities in the west that have drained the Colorado and other sources of water. So we give them water. They clearly want to not rely on the middle east for oil so are looking to us their northerly neighbor. And thus we are building a pipeline from Alberta all the way to Texas.

It's OK, you seem to like the sound of your own voice. It's great that you can read wikipedia and consider yourself an expert , and yes, I am supporting the government, it's obvious by my post isn't it?

Oh the classic beyond and above context to discredit someone. NICE. hmm your the one implying i knew NOTHING about this and now suddenly when I say that what I do know I back up with sources I am an expert? from yes wikipedia, mostly pictures taken from other sources. EVER click those little blue numbers and links?

Obviously you take the time to waste your breath with this idiot or expert but why don't you just attack my sources, say the UN is BS or whatever. Or provide your sources, at least some other guy is TRYING. That shows a logical mind. You know. I believe in A because 1-2-3.

Where as you come in here and are like "your stupid and know nothing so why should I listen to you". That's a straight up I believe in A without a 1-2-3.

Or you come in here and are like "oh your a expert cause you can read wikipedia". That's again a straight up I believe in A without a 1-2-3. At least I have a 1-2-3 and until you address and reference them your just another asshole with an opinion!

So ask yourself the question who are you trying to convince here? yourself? not on any academic ethical level brohan. But lets continue to play horse, I'll be the front end and you keep being yourself

You know that common knowledge thing that if the rest of the world lived like Canadians and Americans we would need three earth's just for resources alone. But hey its ok buddy. If you want to support your government just because they are your government, by all means brohan! So if our government elites decide that 14 billion is too high a price to pay to be part of a protocol that can save our environment then yeah go ahead. Your not going to benefit from that 14 billion LOL, only corporations.

Remember a country doesn't just pay the carbon tax on what is actually being produced inside the country, but what it is importing and exporting as well. Hence that link you probably didn't read of how the European Union wanted to ban or tax heavily oil coming from Alberta because of its cost to environment and how the WTO was like no no no you can't do that you said our charter and corporations have rights you know and the European union was like ****.

Anyway back to you brohan. What was it again that I didn't know? That Kyoto wasn't achievable? Ok well I linked in this post and above this one and in the thread there are other posts that show evidence it is achievable. So smart-ass who regurgitates what elites say to justify actions that will benefit other elites, what is the WAY to stop emissions other than the framework set out by the Kyoto accord? hmm? see if Canada pulled out of Kyoto and said no we think the world should do this then thats fine. But as of yet they just left, didn't even really show up at Durban. Pathetic.

It's hard to get the big picture when you have such a small screen. oh btw how exactly is it obvious that I am the one that has to idea about this?.

Why you and Harper and Kent look retarded to the world claiming Kyoto was never achievable or pointless or whatever brohan. Green are the countries part of it. dark green the industrialized ones. Oh and try to deduce why America and now Canada are not green

Why it is achievable.

So keep talking, someday you'll say something intelligent!

I heard the big issue, and probably why that map looks like that, is because places like China have a scam going on with buying carbon credits from them selves to off set their carbon emissions. China should probably be black on that map.

I heard the big issue, and probably why that map looks like that, is because places like China have a scam going on with buying carbon credits from them selves to off set their carbon emissions. China should probably be black on that map.

According to South: (taken from his post)

[ China and India two DEVELOPING nations are supposed to do what exactly? remain poor? no sorry its a world effort, they have the most number of people, and per capita less pollution. By capita CANADA has one of the HIGHEST. They are ALLOWED to develop while we have to cut back. Does this put us at a disadvantage, who cares the environment is going to give a fly ****..]

So China does not need to reduce its emission at all for its a developing country, China needs to develop, therefore its ok for them to pollute the environment...and doesnt need to adhere to the Kyoto accord while Canada has to..hey.. I thought you said its a world effort......so by you, any map graph and links is true and Lorrie Goldstein article is all made up by him?
so get off your high horse and get at the real facts, do some travelling to Asia and you will face the real facts...... opps you dont need to .. you have google map...

Canada will be penalise to the tune of $14 billion dollars while the US and China do not face any penalty.. isnt this a world effort?, so why does the Kyoto accord allows such disproportion?

Canada did the right thing by opting out and Canada will still be loved by the world. and they love to emigrate here as well and really for we are peaceful people...

Of course China and India are going to be low when it's a per capita comparison, look how large they are and how many are still living in poverty? Weak argument is weak.

Quote:

Why you and Harper and Kent look retarded to the world claiming Kyoto was never achievable or pointless or whatever brohan. Green are the countries part of it. dark green the industrialized ones. Oh and try to deduce why America and now Canada are not green

Um...Australia isn't in Kyoto anymore and even when they were, they were huge polluters

Quote:

Why it is achievable.

So keep talking, someday you'll say something intelligent!

Hey looky here! Eastern Bloc countries, shocking they're improving huh? The Soviets were always so well known for their stringent environmental policies

You look like you just did a quick search on google, found a few graphs on images and built an argument around them not knowing how many holes were in it. Stick to politics, I'll admit you're quite good on those topics.